Posted By:
Eric Eichelkraut (goudeyhunter)Thanks for the scans Frank and Robert, I especially think Robert's comparison scans of the same player is very interesting. I just received my Colgans square today, and was surprised to see that the stock was so thin (like the 1910 W-uncat). My example doesn't have any ruminants of black paper on the back either, but was obviously removed from another piece of paper of card board stock. So I'm still wondering about this issue.
I've always been under the impression that the squares were a made as cards, until now. Now that I see mine, and hear from others, it seems like the majority of them have a flaky backside (like they've been removed from something). Now I can only assume that these squares weren't intended or issued as cards. A good argument for this theory is the shape that most are in, a sort of discombobulated square. This doesn't help me with the advertising piece theory either, as I would think an advertising piece would have been more polished and cut squarer. The notebook idea is a good one, but if they were part of a greater notebook cover at one time, why are all examples cut down to almost the same exact size?
The "Colgan" squares really perplex me, as I can't think of one possible way that these were issued, without finding a side of impossibility. I do believe that these squares were some sort of issue produced by Colgans, and I do believe that they were not issued as a card, but as another piece. Although I was convinced to think that they couldn't be proofs, the thought does make some sense now, as I can't think of a product that these cards would come from, where they would all be nearly the exact same size, have rough backs, be cut abnormally (usually), and sometimes have black paper attached to the backside.
If anyone has more information on them Colgans squares, I'd really like to hear their insight or theories (here or you can email me). Thanks for all the great posts so far..they've been extremely helpful!!